As you know,
Raymond Chandler, like many of his time, was busy as a writer, the celluloid
industry, however, the only specially prepared script for a film, that was for "The Blue Dahlia ", directed by
George Marshall.
George Marshall was a director rather eclectic film ranged from comic to film
westerns, crime movies.
In our case, signs a delightful film, by that strip of film noir in 40s, that
respects the canonicity of similar films (the unfaithful woman, the man
betrayed the gangster, punch, smoke and alcohol in abundance, and a good
offense, and of course the innocent who must prove his innocence against all),
but enriches it with the motif strongly felt in those years, the veterans
returned home as heroes, and then prevented by circumstances other than back
into the everyday world. It almost seems the plot of Rambo: even there, in the
first of 4 movies, the theme was the failure to return to work and to normal
life of the veteran, rejected by the very people who ought to have a hero's
welcome.
Here there are three veterans: Captain Navy aviation, Johnny Morrison, who is
the protagonist of the story, his subordinate and his friend Buzz Wanchek, that
due to a bullet in the skull suffers from hallucinations, severe headaches,
moments of absence and severe amnesia, and their friend George Copeland. Johnny
returns home, hoping that his wife Helen is waiting (but in a sense predicting
the opposite), and locates her in the middle of a party in his apartment, in a
bungalow hotel complex, with friends who he doesn’t know, and he betrays a
certain Eddie Harwood, owner of a local, “The Blue Dahlia”.
But it’s not so much to discover that his wife has a lover but that she was the
cause of death of their only son, the spring that triggers an argument between
the couple, after which, Johnny leaves his wife for ever, that could have
killed, together with his pistol, a 45.

It's
rainingcats
and dogs: Johnnycomes
out ofa
second anddisappears. Locatedrandomlyon the street- look at thecoincidences-a beautifulblonde whogives hima ride(Joyce Harwood) to turnhis wifeHelen'slover. But whilethe two travelby car, someone really wants tokillthe wife ofJohnny, which is thussuspectedtobe theperfectmurder. At thispoint heshouldtryin everyway to find themurderessof his wifeand prove hisinnocence,therighthelpJoyce, fell in lovewith him, andbrokewith her husband.At this point, Johnnycollideswith Eddieand his partner, a
scoundrelwith whom hehasrobbed abankmessenger boykilledfor nothing: the
twoare wantedfor many years, but they changedtheir names andnowthey are protectedfromany
investigation, as long asJohnnydoes not understand, warnedfrom the
backof a photo, takenat the home ofhis
wife, that Eddieis actuallythe false namebehind
whichlies amurderess:
it would seem at this pointthat the two wereinvolvedin'murderof his wife, butit is not.And so thefinal
will bea confessionofthe unexpectedunexpected, as is therecognition thatwhat
seemeda confession(Buzz Wanchekfailsto focus onwhat madethe
nightof the murder, and isprey toterrible
memories: Helentorethe petalsof a
floweroneby one, afrighteningnoiseandloud music) really is not.

Of course the film ends with the two main characters Johnny and Joyce greet
you but what you say makes you think that a little later will meet again.The film, beautifully directed and acted, he entered the
quintet of eligible candidates for an Oscar for best screenplay in 1946. As for
the players, we must especially mention Johnny and Joyce, who was Alan Ladd and
Veronica Lake, very close-knit pair at the time. At the time, Lake was on the
crest of the wave, so that the hairstyle that she had launched (a fringe
falling over one eye by hiding it) had infected a lot of the female audience. As
that hair had caused many accidents, especially among workers, whose hair was
drawn between the gears of the machinery, the government asked Lake to change
her hairstyle.Ladd hand, while being appreciated, especially because of
the low-budget movies they always sell a lot, really became famous a few years
later with the interpretation of “Shane”
(1953).The third actor in this poster along with Ladd and Lake,
was William Bendix, characterizations of the time, whose role in the film would
not seem to be on the same plane as the first two, so why was placed next to
them? For the popularity? Bendix is ​​true that some years before he was nominated for
an Oscar for Best Performance by Actor in Wake Island (1942) by John Farrow,
and had been with Ladd and Lake in “The Glass Key” (1942) from a work by Dashiell
Hammett (screenplay by Jonathan Latimer), and then a magnificent interpreter of
Alfred Hitchcock's Lifeboat (1944), a film in half and psychological warfare.Here she seems to play a role all its own. Indeed, as the
film proceeds, a not inconsiderable part focuses on the characterization of the
veteran with shrapnel in the brain and prey to strong amnesia and
hallucinations, for how he behaves and what he says, at some point it would
almost seem to be in films the murderer. In reality, it was learned that
Chandler had in fact intended that, the part of the murderer (he had to kill
the faithless Helen, because very attached to her husband Johnny), until it was
- by American military authorities - refused that a veteran and for more
disabled, could be attributed to the characterization of a murderer. So Chandler
changed the identity of the murderer. But as the film progresses, I repeat, it
seemed to me that this shift had not occurred before the beginning of the film,
but along the way: in fact, the drama tends to Buzz, which would be an ideal
guilty, and with a strong psychological, until a sharp turn at the end, the
less likely it is identified with a motivation of the killers and truly
laughable: blackmail. The murderer would have blackmailed for her affair with
Eddie, threatening to reveal everything to her husband, but she refused and so,
fearing that she revealed all to Eddie, he would kill her; everything now when
Helen was left forever by Johnny and she also broke up with Eddie, played by
Howard Da Silva

domenica 25 marzo 2012

Steve Fisher : I Wake Up Screaming, 1960

(2nd version)

Steve Fisher (1912-1980) was
a great hard-boiled writer, one of the great writers of the '40s.
Despite, however, that Fisher is known because of his novels hard-boiled, not
everyone knows that its beginnings were related to classic mystery : it began
to practice his writing career (except for Satan's Angel in 1935) with Murder
of the Admiral, 1936 (signed Stephen Gould) followed by Murder of the Pigboat
Skipper (alternate title Murder on the S-23), 1937, in which he made his debut
a naval officer, whose face was unrecognizable because of an accident.
Steve Fisher is known for being one of
the old friends of Cornell Woolrich.

This novel has
had a troubled life: it was published in two different versions. With"I Wake UpScreaming", publishedin 1941, SteveFishermade ​​abig jumpfromPulpMagazine(such as BlackMask) to the books. Witnessinga greatsuccess of the novel, renovated withtwofilms(into the first, 1941,recitedVictorMature andBetty Grable), Fisher thoughtin 1960to rewritethe novel. It’s the second, the 60s, that I explore here.
What you notice immediately, is the cut of the novel. How much of cinematic
language is in this novel? Very much, in my opinion.
First, the story.

A successful
writer one day he sees a girl who does the secretary into the Studios, and he
falls in love: she is beautiful, simple, direct. Obviously the first order is
the same: to have sex .. and then end up in bed: she doesn’t wish, but he's
really good, and then .. but then something else takes over. So he falls in
love. Old history. But this time, it is reversed. Usually to go to bed with a
woman who dreams of becoming a showgirl, you promise all if.. Here is the
opposite. The idea of ​​making a star is later, and Peg put commiment
together with three other guys: Craig Lanny, his friend, screenwriter of film
series B, Robin Ray, an actor whose career is continuously to the test "by
his achievements" when they leave, and Hurt Evans, a director known, but
always in the bill, for little pay that they give, and known also because he
constantly tries tohave sex

with starlets.

Vicky Lynn, the
secretary who wants to be an actress, she understood that serves to launch the
gossip, that is to tell everyone that Robin Ray fell in love with her, just
that this thing getsnervous

Peg, very
jealous.
Vicky has a sister, Jill, much like her, and indeed a lot more beautiful. Peg,
although in love with Vicky, is sensitive to sex appeal of the sister, but now
everything is taken from Vicky. But one day, going to her at six in the
afternoon, found dead her in his apartment, killed by a blunt object with which
it was shot on the head: not a tear, no blood, just a bruise, but how much is
enough to kill her. Only the sister of Vicky believes in the innocence of Peg.
The police, however, submitted him to questioning of "fourth degree",
but it has not been authorized. So it ends up that those responsible are suspended,
he is freed with an apology from the prosecutor. Indeed, now the suspects are
focused on the clerk, a stolid type, a doorman who seems to have escaped.
Now that Vicky's gone, it explodes and unspeakable secret love between Peg and
Jill. And Vicky? Vicky has somehow forgotten.
From him, from her, but not by Ed Cornell, homicide detective, a tough guy, one
of those who have "questioned" Peg and that now was previously
suspended: Ed is convinced against all reasonable doubt that Peg is the
murderer. From that moment began a manhunt: Ed seeks evidence to condemn Peg to
death, Peg does not understand why Ed hates him so much.
The doorman of the building is not. Someone begins to think he's dead, and Peg
begins to be suspected, and some are beginning to think that Ed is not
completely played. Meanwhile, however, the other three partners in the launch
of Peg Vicky had good reason to kill her. Lanny has signed a contract for Vicky
and it would serve his wife divorce him. Hunt has signed a bill on the life of
Vicky fifty thousand dollars, that would serve all right to raise its meager
finances. Robin is suspected because if she had left him, it would be a mortal
blow to his career.

However, the novel has its specific gravity is not indifferent. Presents
portraits, several characters of the time, contains direct allusions to other
writers (Horace McCoy), also indirect (for example, Cornell Woolrich). He is
physically built taking as a model Cornell Woolrich. As
it happens, in fact, the psychopathic cop named Ed Cornell (Cornell Woolrich)
has physical features and behavior conferred by his friend. High,
all skin and bones, red hair, very pale, "the only man he knew that in
those years, wore a bowler hat." The isolation of Cornell Woolrich and his
life obsessively devoted to the celebration of his
mother, is the isolation of Ed, a character who is alone in a world he does not
understand and who does not understand him. And, and that he uses for his
purposes (the attorney who must respond to public opinion) .

Eddie is the "doppelganger" of Peg, he is death that haunts him, obsessively,
convinced him in the bone him and not others is the murderer; conviction which then
takes criminal reliefs, when it is discovered
that Ed had already figured out who he was the
real murderess, covering, for the purpose of diverting suspicion and instead
directing all towards Peg, because he who must die, because he betrayed Vicky.Ed’s
hate towards Peg also has the relief of "social
hate". He is the poor investigator, who loves his work, yet he is poorly
paid, he is forced to exhausting shifts, living in a dump,he is sick with TB ,
and he is also helpless, he is a subject avoided by women, though he does not
hate them, but hates mens loved by them, he hates those who are more fortunate;
he hates the writer and screenwriter of success, the men who fall in love women
they seduce, the men take them to bed, he earns in a week what Ed earns in a
month. In
the novel, there is a whole series of platitudes that cinema has given us
several times: the detective who is sipping cold nights and to tail a suspect,
almost catches pneumonia (for example, how can we forget Gene Hackman in John
Frankenheimer’sThe French Connection?), two sisters
almost identical, the boyfriend of the dead woman who falls in-law, escape the
police in hot pursuit, the officer psychopath.But
the hatred seems also dictated by personal reliefs: Ed surely knew Vicky, he
had been secretly in love, perhaps rejected the first time because helpless.Perhaps
this love in the initial draft would have been more visible, maybe you would
have thought of mistaken identity between Vicky and Jill, perhaps the same Ed could
be the killer , accusing Peg to save himself.

Hypothesis too risky? What
remains is a murderer predictable, too, and a final .. nice but a bit obvious,
as if the murderer was only a makeshift, used in a different wording from the
original, although perfect in a noir so intense.

And remains the picture at times merciless and hard of the Mecca of cinema and the picture of the
golden world where Steve Fisher worked.

martedì 20 marzo 2012

Brown Meggs : Saturday Games, 1974

The authordoes not sayanything to anyone: BrownMeggs. It would appearthe nameof someone, but no,it is theoriginalname. MeggBrown wroteonly thatdamnlittle.In fact hehadanother jobworking: he knew well,seems very well, classical music and opera, and was asuccessfulexecutive atCapitol Records, a famousAmericanrecord label. One dayhe madethe shotof his life: he managedto winthe rightsfor the marketing ofBeatles recordsin the USA. Howeverhe had writtena novel, "SaturdayGames", this, translated inItalywith the title "Games on Saturday."

We say itright away, solet there beany criticism: it's nota masterpiece, but not far off, or it is.In short,we are dealing withan exceptional work: a few timesI found myselfbeforea first film, extraordinary: GastonLeroux, PhilipMacDonald, ElleryQueen. Thisis another case.Truly remarkablenovel, more thrilleryellow, witha spiral structure, and morestoriesthat intertwinewith each otherand from the waythey enterand asthey relaxin synergydeterminethe pace, which is initiallyweak,and it mustbebecause the storyisthenbeginninghis narrative, but thenbecomesincreasinglyfibrillating.

Thenovel begins withthesetwowho wake up, each in his ownhouse,naked andsweaty: oneis a scientist, the other a cop,but bothdo not rememberanything ofwhat they didthe night before. They were bothdrunk, itsaid.The police officermust meet witha psychologist, her friend(lover, best),with whichfooddeliciouslunchesevery Saturdayand afterthe succulentlunch, repass..theKama Sutra. Hewouldcontinue to havea reportmade​​lunches,love,travel andlots of sex, but shewants toget marriedwhileheis attracted. The beauty is thatthe policeman, Sergeant AnsonFrères, the nextstepto lieutenant, according to all hisclassmates, the fact thathe had liveda long timewith his mother, wasbuckleda reputation aseffeminate andcoconutmother,while she wasquite the opposite, a satyr.

The fact is thaton the Saturday, when hewould to spendthe afternoonwith a psychologistto practicesexual positions, and whilethe other, the scientist, along withtwo of hiscolleagues andtheir boss(part ofateamscientists workingin aspace project) plays tennis like allthe Saturdaymorning , someone callthe police becausesomeone is trying to hitwith the bow and the arrows a deer, who, wounded, wentto hidein the woods. The fact is that, when they beginthe research, find the other:in apinktrashbag, a woman looks at thesky,eyes open, fixed. Theface is beautifulbut it showsalreadysome thirtyyears, the hair iswet andmattedwith blood, the body is completelynaked,was killedby at leastsix hours, breaking through theskull withabluntblow.From herebeginsthe story. Andthe rhythm picks up.

Eachtimethe gap wason the tennis courtwhere the fourplay. Itsoon becomes clear thatthe deal is, and that at leastknewthattheslain: it wasactuallyoneof the threefrom whichher ​​husbandwas about todivorce.The otherstry to remember, and betweena balland anotherexchangeofimpressions: Vinnie, andNeilHoward. Not withtheir leaderBaron, but onlyamong themselves. Whytalk about whathappenedthe night before, and hemust not know. In short,something happened thatconnected ornot connected to thedeath of thegirl, must not becomeawareof their leader. He, the cuckolded husband, suspects thatone of the otherthree isthe current loverof his wife, a woman who has sex withthe same frequency asan actressin apornfilm in which thepilesareinterchangeable. In shortwe have:three scientistswho havedone something thathas to dowith the deathof thegirl, the husband of thiswas going todivorce herfor infidelityof the womanmanifests, a policemanwhosesport isto have sexwith a psychologist, a doctor legalratherthan putthefull stops, opens upotherdisquietingprospects. Meanwhilethe investigationcontinues.

And among thevolees, the loops offourstraightandon the tennis court, smallfragments of ashockingtruthtobeinsertedin their place, and while Neiland Howardslowlyrememberwhat they didwithEmjay, the woman who simply has an industrial quantity ofsex withanyoneshe likes, a cleaning lady whoistidying upinthe neighborhoodof the mostbeautiful villawith pool,discovers ablood-stainedcarpet andparquet,underwearin the bathroom, while the guy whotakes careof the pool, discoversblood stains, a pool of vomitand other amenities. In short.. it's easy to connect the placewith the deathof the wifeof the scientist. Meanwhile,the investigationbecomestight, increasinglytight, and when thepace ishot andnew detailsemerge, it is always the gameof tennisthat bringsattention to the foursuspects, their errorsat the net,strangefor fourtypeshardcourtseven ifthey doonce a week, and theirlong gameis intertwinedwith theuncertainrelationshipbased onsex of theofficerandpsychologist, on investigationsof AnsonandYee(anotherpoliceman,China), on those of YeeMartinez (another policemanagain). Truth thatspeaksof bottlesof gin, a lot ofmarijuanasmoke, apartyof fourpeople, threemenand a woman ina villawith swimming pool, three menanda womannaked, marijuana, alcohol andlots of sex: all three areresponsible? Or justone? Or are theyinnocent? It wasa sexualmurder? Oratragicfate?

It all comes downto an extraordinary finalwherethe killer is the leastsuspected . And I must say, thing thatalways I remarkwhen I speakof novelswhich I considerextraordinary, Brownleadsthe readerby the nose(including myself and I am notused to bebrought himby the nose) beforeputtingtheclues, which of coursedoes not revealthe scopebutin the end, and only at theend ofthe last pages, revealsthe shockingtruth.The novelis linkedin some waywith theproceedings,later usedby PaulHalter, in his masterpiece, Le brouillard rouge,another novelin which the bloodis the master.

ThemysteryofHeyer, wasdesignedin such a waythat
reflectedhis conceptionof orderand respectfor the rules,not only at the romancebut also in the society : socialgroupssmall, closed,
in which the variousrolesare fixed andrigid, as
ifwheneveryou were torecitea scriptwhose
backgroundwas, if not equal,
at least strangely similarin concept.So whenI approachedtheHeyernovels,
I confess, I've been very cautious: they have got avery strongpsychological
characterization, andthe cluesare found, if sought,into conversationsinvariablyturn: so
you have toput up withall dialogues,
allright, noskipping, when reading amystery novel, andgenerallypayingattentionto
other scenarioshere, one must beverycareful.Andthen, Heyer's novels, in my humbleopinion, althoughinteresting they are also verydemanding, in the merereading.

This is not our
case: The Unfinished Clue (1934), the
third list of Heyer mystery after Footsteps
in the Dark (1932) and Why Shoot a
Butler (1933), is for me a delightful little masterpiece. The novel is both
very light and it has extraordinary capacity for introspection, dialogues that
seem unnecessary, if not contained, appropriately screened, important clues,
which in turn can only identify the hound. In our case, he is the Scotland Yard
Inspector Harding, called into question after the murder of an old retired
military officer, the rude, grumpy and even despotic General Sir Arthur
Billington-Smith. The General was found in his study, stabbed by a knife, but
it seems that in the moments immediately preceding the death, have tried to
write something, a syllable, in this case, "LA", but that probably
meant nothing more: a name perhaps?
At the time there were several people in his country mansion, “The Grange”, and
many felt something against him: his son Geoffrey, son of first marriage,
disowned by its union with Lola, a dancer of Mexican local second 'order; his
nephew, Captain Francis Billington-Smith, so amoral, cynical, and desirous of its
assets; Lola, Geoffrey’s ruin, and fierce opponent of the way to see things of General; the General’s cousin, the indecipherable
Stephen Guest, failure in love, even though for two years from Lady Smith
Billington, to the provocative Camilla Halliday, a guest with her husband and stolid
Emily Chudleigh, devoted wife of the Vicar Chudleigh Hilary, proud opponent of
the moral standards of the General and divorce. So quite a large group of
potential murderers. Among them could be Therese E. Lamb, first Lady
Billington-Smith, and mother of Geoffrey.

What must be
said, and that happens regularly in this novel, it is that the murderer or
murderess, in short who kills, he/she does not premeditated the murder, but
because it happens any accident that drives the action, the lack of which would
mean the salvation of the victim. What then isn’t told that the victim really
is victim, how it isn’t said that the murderer really is the personification of
evil in its various shades (greed, avarice, sloth, jealousy, envy, etc.etc.).
As in many other novels. So, in this novel, as well as in other Heyer’s novels,
nothing is safe.
As if the motive is uncertain, imaginehow difficult it isto identifythe liar”! The murderer frankly, I think in this
context he would be savedifhe didn’t chose tosave an innocent.

To be honest, the
plot of the novel is based on time and.. on the hedges that surround the road:
the clue is connected with the time and place where he says he saw the
innocent. I must admitthat the outcome
ofHeyersomething thatis astonishing: a stroke ofgenius.I say no more: I
will nottake away the pleasureof
readingthis wonderfulnovel

The
Inspectormustunravela skeinunusuallyintricate, and in themeantime thatbrilliantly
solves thecase (butthe murderer/murederess,
who is acrediblecharacter, in the round he/she will have timeto commit suicide"classically" with cyanideof potassium), falls in love, reciprocated, even theyoung
sisterof the general,DinahFawcett.Moreover, byGeorgetteHeyerwhat it would
be expectedat the endif not alove story?

sabato 10 marzo 2012

When,in 1985, PaulHalterwroteLa Malédiction de Barberousse, anyone didn’t know him, at least as a writerof detective novels. But hewanted toemerge. I imagine he likedto think thatas
hehad lovedCarr, Christie andRawson, sootherpeople couldfall in love withhis novels. So I suppose well that he well thoughtto be knownwithout
resortingtofriendships thatmay not have hadat that time, it was necessary towina competition, no matter how big, toosmall, alocal
contest, butsufficiently large tomake it knownin acircle ofadmirers. Andso he joinedthe"Prix de laSociétédesécrivainsd'AlsaceetdeLorraine"
in 1986. And hewon.
From therehe beganhis career, which thenhada surgewhen the yearafterhe won with"La Quatrième Porte" the "PrixduFestivaldeCognac" and
twoyears later with"Le
BrouillardRouge" the all-important"Grand PrixduRomand'Aventures ". So, in 1988, it couldbe said hecameto
success, which neverlefthim. Since then he
haswritten manynovelsintheir field, youcanbasicallyrecognizetwowell-defined series, relatedto the
charactersof OwenBurns(5novels) and
especiallyDr.AlanTwist(plus or minus
twenty, to date), and even some
novelswithoutrecurring
character. It'was translatedmainly inItalyandJapan, andelsewhere.

However, a
question that leaps to the eye even more is this: why Halter tied to its
success to Twist?
Good question!
In the Italian case (I do not know whether it can apply elsewhere), the success
was mainly due all'anglofilia surname. Italy has been particularly receptive
from the beginning of the Anglo-Saxon police culture, and even when I was
massively translated French authors, these states are relegated to a niche, so
that the issues which I refer, are becoming a rare commodity. Beyond
collecting, Italy has loved from the beginning all the leading exponents of
Anglo-Saxon rather than tolerated Alps. So it ended up that if the character's
name from the author calls a primary hard by France, success is relative,
whereas in the case calls the Anglo-Saxon origin, it has the opposite. In our
case, then, even the author's name can lead into error, because, essentially
French, Alsatian is actually Halter. And so, even for a coincidence of
fortuitous (or desired: Halter has not taken a pseudonym), the writer Alsatian
became the idol of many.
But the success of the novels that Dr. Twist as a main character, is also due
to other reasons. First of all ... having chosen "her shoulder", a
character like the Inspector Archibald Hurst, inventory that Halter is a bit of
romance 'as the Inspector of the CID Hadley by Carr, a policeman, whose
misfortune is that to encounter more cases that have neither head nor tail, and
which seem to belong to the supernatural and the impossible. Luckily the bad luck
is offset by the good fortune to know precisely how a criminologist Dr. Twist,
who, like Fell or Merrivale Carr, has the advantage of being able to solve the
mysteries just as impossibly intricate. Moreover, the pair of investigators,
from the time of Conan Doyle, is synonymous with success, what would Holmes
without Watson? Or Hercule Poirot without the naive and hopelessly romantic Cap
Hastings? Philo Vance without Markham ? O Queen without Ellery Queen Richard?
Or Drury Lane without Thumm? Without doubt, the novels of these authors that
there are almost always more expensive than the figure in which the character
of the foreground and his shoulder.

Sohe tiedHalterTwist, at somepoint in hisliteraryparable, when it becameindependent from thecontestsin which it participated, withhis entourage. I do not thinkone case, in fact, that the first threenovels, those with whom hehadparticipated in the threecompetitionsof1986-1987
and1988,showingTwist, tworobesa little'different: thefirst ever, La MaledictiondeBarberousse,which is curiouslynot be thefirst to bepublished, butisonlyin 1995,
Twisthas alreadypresentedas acriminologist,
while in thesecond novelto bepresentedincorcorso"La Quatrième Porte," which then will be thefirst to bepublished, Twistisstillpresentedas an ex-Inspector ofScotlandYard.
Inessence then, the
very firstof his novelsis setin anindefinite, if not later, whenpackshis second novel, in which, havingbecome awareof
thesuccess ofTwist, in a senseitanticipatesthepreviousadventure.

Take the case of "La malediction de Barberousse".
The story unfolds in Alsace, Huguenau, the city where the same Halter was born.
The story starts off in 1948 with a letter from his brother Etienne Jean Martin,
remembers where the murder took place in impossible circumstances, sixteen
years before, in 1932, Eva Muller, a German girl, the one thatcall a girl of easy virtue, who soon
became the muse of erotic fantasies of three children: Jean, Etienne, and François.Instead, Marie Biechy had never
born.Together with the sister of Francois, Marie Biechy, five had gathered in
the ruins of the castle Huguenau to play.The
ruins of the castle is said to be haunted by the ghost of the Emperor Frederick
Barbarossa, who had lived before leaving for the Crusade.The father of Jean and Etienne had
conjured them not to go there anymore, and still had begged them to hear what
he had to tell the Commissioner Sutter, a policeman with the hobby of ethnic
and historical research, which had done extensive research on the Barbarossa in
theirregion: there was an old
legend that anyone who had offended the memory of Alsace Barbarossa or places
dear to him, incurred the wrath.And
in fact there had been several centuries in a series of deaths
incomprehensible: all had one thing in common.The victims were killed by a sword.
The next day the Commissioner Sutter tells them about the various suspicious
deaths, through the centuries: the bailiff dead in his room locked from the
inside at the time of Frederick II; Sublon a soldier at the time of the Dutch
War in 1675, which wasfound dead with severed hands and a sword planted in the
back on a street surrounded by flames, with no possibility of escape, but even
without that others outside of the farmers who wanted to kill him, I could do;
a foolish German during the occupation of'Alsace, after insulting the residents
and the town, and a friend had been hunted by villagers who wanted to make him
pay for: not to be taken was hoisted on the roof of the bridge over the river,
where nobody could get him downbut,
while watching the two outputs of the bridge, no one was able to prevent the
German was killed with a sword.